Mud

I am looking for an overall critique here. This shot was with Ilford XP2 and some post-processing was done with levels and curves. I wanted to show a cause and effect type shot where the majority of the frame is on this muddy mess then you see the cause. The dogs leg is really white to contrast with the dark mud of the rest of the shot.

I think its a really cool shot. However, I think it's really lacking in contrast, which makes it look blown out even though it really isn't all that blown out. I think there's a lot of detail that should be there that isn't. This is probably just a matter of personal preference, but I think the film choice is off. I don't think XP2 is a good match for this kind of shot. I'd like to see a deeper, more contrasty shot that really makes all the details in the mud pop out. They bring to mind wrinkles in a face. This may be just a stupid opinion rant but I probably would have shot it with PanF if i were using Ilford film.

I also would like to see a tighter shot. The movement of the mud color/lighting from dark to light (left to right in the photo) I think should be more pronounced. The shot fades from dark to light by mid-frame, leaving the right hand side looking too evenly lit. I'd say a crop to cut out some of the right side might be in order. Yet, things like that would be extremely difficult to pick up during composition, so its hardly something to be at fault over.

MaxBloom: I sort of like the lack of contrast in the mud because its dirty and sort of boring. What I was worried about in terms of detail was the dogs leg because it was blown out when I metered off the mud. But I guess there will inevitably be a loss of detail in a shot with a white dog leg and a patch of dark mud. I understand what you say about the lighting though, even after the shot I didn't notice how it goes from dark to light

Yes, I agree that the contrast is fine, I see where your going with this. The problem may lay that the shot is too heavy on the the top left corner; all the action is happening there, the chain, the dog leg. It draws the eye to the corner and the texture of mud is lost. Maybe if the shot was more tighter or croped near the leg, it would be less of a distraction.

I bet if you were able to capture something else in the bottom right of the frame like, for example, more of the dogs chain (even if you kind of had to set it up that way) the composition would feel more balanced. I think the idea is great but it probably could have been executed a little better.

I was thinking something like this. Adding another element to the other side of the image seems to balance the composition much more. I would of course go for something a little more dynamic and not exactly what im showing here.